Home»Commentary»“Theybies”: The New Term For Children Of Parents Who Neglect To Teach Them What Gender They Actually Are

“Theybies”: The New Term For Children Of Parents Who Neglect To Teach Them What Gender They Actually Are

Pinterest WhatsApp

Yes, these parents should either be charged with child neglect or child abuse, in my opinion.  This is not something that people can reasonably differ on.  It is the result of the continuing degeneration of the culture around us because of the degenerate, sinful nature of man.  The latest example of the symptom of America’s ungodliness comes in what is being termed as “theybies,” or children of parents who want the child to “choose” their own gender.

Aside from it being completely physically, psychologically and scientifically impossible for a person to actually change their gender.  There are parents who are doing this to their children and, no doubt, we are going to see the fruit of their dishonesty and neglect in said children.

If you’re not familiar with this, I first heard about it in a news report on the singer Pink, as she and her husband declared they were going to have a gender-neutral “label-free” household.

At that time Newsweek wrote:

Recording artist Pink wants parents to have more conversations about gender stereotypes with their children and she has seemingly started with her own kids.

“We are a very label-less household,” the singer, 38, said in an interview with British newspaper The Peopleon Sunday. She allows wiggle room for her two children: Willow Sage, 6, and Jameson Moon, 1.

Gender neutral parenting doesn’t mean denying a child the sex they were assigned at birth or pressuring them into a specific gender identity. Though some take the parenting style to the extreme (by demanding everyone in a child’s life use gender-neutral pronouns), Pink tries to not make assumptions about her children based on sex. As Pink described it, Willow told her once that she was going to grow up and marry a woman from Africa. Pink simply said, “Great, can you teach me how to make African food?”

It’s not so much that Pink isn’t allowing Willow to be a girl; she’s trying not to assume that Willow will grow up to be gay, straight, bisexual, transgender (when one’s gender identity doesn’t match the sex they were assigned at birth), or genderqueer (when one’s gender identity is both,neither, or some combination of male and female). As Pink stated in her Video Music Awards speech over the summer, identifying as a girl or woman doesn’t have to mean much of what our society believes it does. Ignoring “labels” or gender signifiers as a parent might mean not denying certain toys to a child because of their gender, or allowing a child of any gender to cry openly.

“I was in a school and the bathroom outside the kindergarten said: ‘Gender Neutral – anybody,’ and it was a drawing of many different shapes,” Pink explained to The People. “I took a picture of it and I wrote: ‘Progress.’ I thought that was awesome. I love that kids are having this conversation.”

Now, in Pink’s case, I can tell you that a lot, at least from my perception, of her thinking came from people who must have been very cruel to her when she was younger, including quite possibly her father.  She has been around for years and some of the lyrics of her songs indicate this.  Don’t think for a moment that doesn’t alter a child’s thinking and if left unchecked, it will effect them as adults, as in Pink’s case.

Sadly, she is now taking this perverse thinking and instead of correcting her daughter to understand her gender and sexuality properly, the way our Creator has taught us, she is promoting the twisted view of gender she now has.  And her daughter will, no doubt, grow up to be even more twisted unless the light of the Gospel comes into her life and corrects her thinking.

NBC reported on this phenomenon in a report titled, “‘Boy or girl?’ Parents raising ‘theybies’ let kids decide.

Three-year-old twins Zyler and Kadyn Sharpe scurried around the boys and girls clothing racks of a narrow consignment store filled with toys. Zyler, wearing rainbow leggings, scrutinized a pair of hot-pink-and-purple sneakers. Kadyn, in a T-Rex shirt, fixated on a musical cube that flashed colorful lights. At a glance, the only discernible difference between these fraternal twins is their hair — Zyler’s is brown and Kadyn’s is blond.

Is Zyler a boy or a girl? How about Kadyn? That’s a question their parents, Nate and Julia Sharpe, say only the twins can decide. The Cambridge, Mass., couple represent a small group of parents raising “theybies” — children being brought up without gender designation from birth. A Facebook community for these parents currently claims about 220 members across the U.S.

“A theyby is, I think, different things to different people,” Nate Sharpe told NBC News. “For us, it means raising our kids with gender-neutral pronouns — so, ‘they,’ ‘them,’ ‘their,’ rather than assigning ‘he,’ ‘she,’ ‘him,’ ‘her’ from birth based on their anatomy.”

Parents in the U.S. are increasingly raising children outside traditional gender norms — allowing boys and girls to play with the same toys and wear the same clothes — though experts say this is happening mostly in progressive, well-to-do enclaves. But what makes this “gender-open” style of parenting stand out, and even controversial in some circles, is that the parents do not reveal the sex of their children to anyone. Even the children, who are aware of their own body parts and how they may differ from others, are not taught to associate those body parts with being a boy or girl. If no one knows a child’s sex, these parents theorize, the child can’t be pigeonholed into gender stereotypes.

This has to be the stupidest thing a parent can do.  Why?  Because you are to be the teachers of your children.  You are the adult, not the child teaching you!

But it’s more than that.  Commentator and author Mark Dice commented on this phenomenon.


The Bible has had plenty to say on this issue.  It instructs women not to wear a man’s clothing (Deuteronomy 22:5).  This is nothing new.  There have always been sinful people who wanted to dress as the opposite sex.

Additionally, many people completely mistinterpret 1 Corinthians 11, which addresses this subject in terms of hair.  It reads:

1Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.  2Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered themto you. 3But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. 4Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. 5But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. 6For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. 7For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man.8For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. 9Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. 10For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. 11Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. 12For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God.13Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? 14Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? 15But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. 16But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God.

Some would try and tell us that it is merely speaking about the length of the hair and while they would attack men who wear their hair long they are hypocritically silent about women who cut their hair short.  However, it is not speaking of length but how the hair is adorned.  My friend Scott Buss presented it so easily that anyone can understand because we are seeing this same sort of perversion in our society today.

Buss writes:

In the original language, the terms used for “long hair” here are komao and komeThis passage is the only place in Scripture where these precise terms are used.

While the more generic term for hair – thrix – is used elsewhere, the more precise komaoand kome convey an effeminate aspect to the manner or style in which long hair is kept. Komao and kome describe hair being worn “in tresses” or in a similarly ornamental fashion. Where thrix would be used to help convey the notion of “plain old long hair”, komao and kome are used to communicate the notion of elaborate or ornamental long hair.

So when we see the presentation of the Nazarite vow in Deuteronomy 6 or the record of Samson in the book of Judges, we are not witnessing a contradiction in Scripture.

We are not seeing the presentation of two opposing lego blocks or fortune cookie snippets from which we may choose to build or support our own pet traditions and preferences as we see fit.

What we are seeing is the coherent, consistent presentation of God’s Nature as it is reflected in His creation where the subject of long hair on men is concerned. That full, coherent presentation tells us two things:

  1. Long hair on a man is not inherently shameful or sinful. (See: Samson and the Nazarite vow, for example.)
  2. Effeminate presentations (“ornamental tresses”, etc.) of long hair on a man is inherently shameful and sinful.

<<< ALERT: From this point forward, we’re moving onto “the gravy” or icing on the cake, so to speak. The meat of the argument centers exclusively on the Word of God as examined above. What follows from here on out is extra stuff not to be taken with the same level of seriousness as the detailed examination of the specific words chosen by God to communicate in this particular passage. >>>

To help make this clearer, let’s return once again to 1 Corinthians 11:13-15, this time focusing on another aspect of the passage:

Judge for yourselves: is it proper for a wife to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not nature itself teach you that if a man wears long hair it is a disgrace for him, but if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her for a covering.

Let’s take a look at the “what nature itself teaches us” about long hair on males, using an example that uniquely symbolizes the Lord and King that we want to honor and serve with all that we do – including the manner in which we deal with hair.

The example from nature to which I refer is the lion. You know, Aslan.

In order to help us along the way on this point, let’s have a look at some pictures of lions. See if you can detect which ones are male and which ones are female

Lioness 1Lion 1Lioness 2Lion 3

Okay, so how hard was it to tell the difference between the male and the female lions?

Not very hard, I’m guessin’…and why?

Because of the hair. More precisely, because of the long hair…on the males.

Is there anything effeminate about the long hair on these male lions?


Not at all.

It’s actually quite a masculine look, am I right?

So what is nature telling us here? More importantly, what is the Word of God telling us?

Is Scripture telling us that it is inherently shameful for a male to have long hair?

Or is it telling us that effeminate stylings of long hair on a male is inherently shameful and sinful?

The whole counsel of God seems to clearly present the latter position, as far as I can tell.

Remember God’s charge concerning a Nazarite vow.  Was he commanding something opposite of what is stated in 1 Corinthians?  Nope, though I’ve had men tell me that.  He was distinguishing the sexes and the genders the way God distinguished them.

The problem with those promoting “theybies” identity is that they are going against nature and flying in the face of the Creator.  Sadly, they are taking their children on that same road of destruction.

I pity their kids actually.  Their moms and dads don’t apparently love them enough to lovingly tell them the truth and correct them where they need to be corrected, even though they know it needs to be done.  They aren’t brave, they’re cowards.

If you don’t believe they know it, click the Newsweek article and listen to Pink’s comments about her daughter and notice what her instinct is over someone saying her daughter looks like a boy.  That right there is a dead giveaway that she is suppressing the truth in unrighteousness (Romans 1:18).

If America would simply return to the foundations of what Scripture teaches, it would truly solve all of our problems, but we think we know what’s best more than the Creator, don’t we, America?

Article posted with permission from Sons Of Liberty Media

Tim Brown

Tim Brown is a Christian and lover of liberty, a husband to his "more precious than rubies" wife, father of 10 "mighty arrows" and jack of all trades. He lives in the US-Occupied State of South Carolina, is the Editor at SonsOfLibertyMedia.com, GunsInTheNews.com and TheWashingtonStandard.com. and SettingBrushfires.com; and also broadcasts on The Sons of Liberty radio weekdays at 6am EST and Saturdays at 8am EST. Follow Tim on Twitter. Also check him out on Gab, Minds, and USALife.
Previous post

Sister of Bundy Ranch Standoff Defendant Wrongfully Sentenced: Todd Engel "Was Not The One In A Law Enforcement Uniform" Committing Crimes

Next post

Report: Wikileaks' Julian Assange To Be Turned Over To UK By Ecuador In "Coming Weeks Or Days"